Last week I said I wouldn’t watch baseball anymore because of all the changes that took away the special rhythm of the sport that set it apart from the others.
I have to admit that I peeked.
Curiosity got the better of me and I checked out a few innings of a couple of exhibition games.
This is what I discovered.
The clock which governs how quickly pitchers must pitch and batters must be ready is working.
Hitters didn’t step out of the batters box and pitchers didn’t step off the mound.
It was bang-bang.
The only problem is, you couldn’t look away or else you would miss a pitch.
To paraphrase Jason Gay, the outstanding sports columnist of the Wall Street Journal, the game was too slow, now it’s too fast.
Baseball, which has dragged along at three-and-a-half hours or more, is now, a nifty two-and-a-half or less.
The issue here is that it has achieved its purpose by artificial means.
It’s not a natural transition.
What made baseball special for me, and a lot of others, I feel, is that the natural pace of the game was unique.
It wasn’t forced.
Now everything it seems, in almost every sport, is an adjustment of the rules every time there’s a trend that bothers people.
What if a fly gets into a hitters eye while awaiting a pitch?
He has to step out, of course.
What if the clock is running down?
Things happen that affect the flow of any game.
Too many strict rules that “rule” the game ruin the game.
So while the game has obviously speeded up, it’s become a rapid-fire affair that is not natural.
And that’s unacceptable.
As a postscript, the extra-inning rule starting with a runner on second base is still a joke, as well as limiting where infielders must be positioned.
Finally, too many views of replays that are meant to “get it right” have killed the pace of all sports.
How did we ever endure games in the last century?
There have been officials’ calls that may not have been correct.
There weren’t many, but they existed.
Even now, with constant reviews, things aren’t always correct.
The pace and flow of sports has been affected.
It may be the way of the world now, but it’s not good.
I frankly have not lost too much sleep over wondering where Aaron Rodgers will throw his next pass.
Rodgers has become the diva poster boy for the NFL.
We all have to admire his ability as a quarterback.
But the fact is, in recent years, Rodgers and the Packers have failed to win a championship that is anticipated every season.
Rodgers has won but a single Super Bowl, which in its own right is a terrific achievement.
Many have accused Packers management of not providing him with the weapons to win. There might be a valid argument in that claim.
But watching from afar, I have seen Aaron Rodgers as a weird figure, constantly voicing his inner feelings, sometimes strange and convoluted, often disappearing into a background of an awkward lifestyle, creating question and doubt.
Now, the world awaits his next move.
Will Aaron Rodgers return to the Packers?
Will he simply retire?
Will he play for another team?
Which team?
I won’t, and never will, resort to salary-cap talk which is as boring as anything in sports.
Here’s my view.
Aaron Rodgers is 39 years old. What team is on the brink, needing only a quarterback to win a Super Bowl.
The Jets? The Raiders? The Saints? The Panthers? Who?
The Packers couldn’t get there with a solidly-build roster.
I have a feeling, and I could be wrong, that even the Packers are ready to move on, and see what they have in Jordan Love, who was drafted by Green Bay in the first round of the 2020 NFL Draft.
Rodgers, was upset with that move, by the way.
Love hasn’t played much, and the jury is still very much out on his prospects. But are the Packers better off going one more year with Rodgers, then turning to Love, or should they pull the plug now, and find out whether they have a successor at QB.
Players abilities all diminish eventually due to age and injury.
What is the upside for any team to say having Aaron Rodgers at quarterback will get them to a Super Bowl?
I can’t find any.
Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, are three championship quarterbacks who stayed too long.
I don’t put Tom Brady in that category because he obviously could still compete on a high level.
Will Aaron Rodgers join the list of three?
We don’t subscribe to declaring a player to retire, ever.
But maybe for Rodgers, it isn’t a bad option.
Lastly, many readers are aware of the professional golf war between the long-standing PGA Tour and LIV golf, the upstart organization that has corralled many of the sport’s top professionals, offering incredible amounts of money, shorter (54-hole) tournaments, and limited fields, with no cuts prior to the final round.
Many PGA stars have been outspoken against the format, emphasizing the tradition of golf as we’ve known it, decrying LIV as purely a money-grabbing venture.
Well, now the PGA has established an 11-event feature in 2024 that will consist of the top 70 players, in a 72-hole tournament with no player cuts after the first two rounds.
Sound familiar.
Rory McIlroy, who has been the most outspoken critic of LIV Golf, is all for the new arrangement, saying, “ I think it makes the Tour more competitive. It’s trying to get the top guys against the hot guys, right?”
Wrong.
It’s copying LIV, and focusing the attention of golf fans on those “special” events, diluting those “usual” tournaments, which is what golf competition has always been about.
We all know what is driving this.
It’s all about more money.
For the top players, and for the PGA Tour.
I believe we’ve written about how money has dictated every move every sport makes.
No one’s complaining. The leagues, the teams, and the athletes are in business.
Making money is what it’s all about.
Just say, it’s good for business.
We understand.
It’s just funny, that in last week’s Arnold Palmer Invitational, a player who had never won on the PGA Tour, triumphed.
His name? Kurt Kitayama.
One of the players who tied for 2d place was Rory McIlroy.
What makes golf special, is the fact that an unknown can play his heart out under extreme pressure, and beat one of the best in the world on any given weekend.
Why are we looking to take that out of the mix?
Even for 11 events.